However, I'm still just conflicted about the existence of this film. I'm torn between "This is a really powerful and smart way to end the franchise, and as much limbo work as you'd have to do to get around the Joker's disappearance, there's nothing wrong with taking half a decade or more away from it," and my friend's words: "When a movie makes three quarters of a billion dollars, or more, and it has sequel potential, the studio is gonna make a sequel whether your crew comes back or not." So it's down to Nolan and crew making a movie which has very little chance of living up to this one...or letting Michael Bay have it.

Kidding. Obviously this isn't gonna be a Bay production. But, you know, there are people on this board talking about things like Robin, Bane, the Penguin, and dismissing Joker by saying he's "At Arkham." So what are the odds another director wouldn't be equally tempted to 'tard it up?

There was no point. I'm drunk.

Well, and granted I realize your example is an exaggerated one, but isn't that sort of the evolution of Zach Snyder coming around to finally deciding to make Watchmen? That it was clear it was gonna definitely get made either way, and he saw the road it would've gone had he not been involved, that it wouldn't have been nearly as faithful or whatever, so in order to "save" it, he went against his previous position and agreed to direct?

I....guess?

I....don't know.

That one.

Still, the odds of Snyder making a fantastic, faithful adaptation of Watchmen are against him. Until recently, the director belonged to a school of thought that believed this dense, dark jewel — the fanboy's Catcher in the Rye, the rite-of-passage text for any serious geek — couldn't and maybe shouldn't be made into a movie.

Enter Warner Bros., which acquired the rights in late 2005. Snyder was working on 300 for the studio at the time, and he was alarmed when he heard about the deal. After some soul-searching, his fear of seeing a bad Watchmen movie trumped his fear of trying to make a great one. ''They were going to do it anyway,'' he says. ''And that made me nervous.'' Over many months, and many meetings, Snyder persuaded Warner Bros. to abandon the Greengrass/Hayter script and hew as faithfully as possible to the comic.

Brilliant.

There is almost certainly no way you can twist the Robin angle to make it anything other than lame. I'm actually amazed that anybody would want that angle brought in, especially when this Batman is not nearly the loner he's always been. Alfred has a much bigger role, Gordon is less of a distant friend, and then there's Morgan Freeman. Oh, Andy....

However, I'm still just conflicted about the existence of this film. I'm torn between "This is a really powerful and smart way to end the franchise, and as much limbo work as you'd have to do to get around the Joker's disappearance, there's nothing wrong with taking half a decade or more away from it," and my friend's words: "When a movie makes three quarters of a billion dollars, or more, and it has sequel potential, the studio is gonna make a sequel whether your crew comes back or not." So it's down to Nolan and crew making a movie which has very little chance of living up to this one...or letting Michael Bay have it.

Kidding. Obviously this isn't gonna be a Bay production. But, you know, there are people on this board talking about things like Robin, Bane, the Penguin, and dismissing Joker by saying he's "At Arkham." So what are the odds another director wouldn't be equally tempted to 'tard it up?

He should be a kid 10 or 11....he doesn't have to fight anybody in the next one....just figure out that Bruce is Batman and start training...it doesn't matter cause they won't introduce him anyways but if they were smart they should be setting up this franchise to last years and not just do a trilogy....there is no reason there can't be 8 more Batman films as long as they are smart and don't screw it up.

How bout the kid in Batman Begins who sees him on the balcony/emergency escape and gets excited, but then says that his friends will never believe him?


...But seriously, no Robin is a good thing.

$600+ world wide.

Forgive me, but with not really being familiar with much of the true comics source material.... Robin and Nightwing are both Dick Grayson? So, what, after awhile he totally sheds the identity of Robin, and Nightwing becomes his like "grown up" superhero name? Has that ever happened elsewhere in comics? Where someone becomes a completely different superhero character based on the fact that they're just much older?

That is one of the GREATEST animated .gifs I've ever seen